|Home||American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections|
|Anonymous User (login or join us)|
Creative Commons license: Public Domain
Dean Jackson -
Subject: Best Laid Plans
Why are the bureaucracies in the former USSR and the East Bloc still run by Communists (90% in the case of the Russian Federal government)?
Why was there no decommunization program after the collapse of the USSR to ferret out Communist agents still in positions of power?
Where were the ‘crimes against humanity’ trials in Russia of Communist criminals after the collapse of the USSR?
Why are KGB/GRU officers from the 1970s and 1980s in control of the major businesses in Russia?
Why are the electorates of the fifteen republics that made up the USSR continuing to elect (since 1992) to the top executive offices in their respective countries persons who were Communists before 1990?
Why do intelligence officers from Russia still defect to the West? Other than from Russia, when has an intelligence officer from a democracy ever defected to another democracy? Never, because such behavior would be oxymoronic.
Though published in 1984, New Lies for Old allows us to answer these disturbing ‘post USSR’ questions for ourselves. Defecting in 1961, KGB Major Anatoliy Golitsyn informed his CIA interrogators that in 1960 all Communist nations had signed onto a new strategy to defeat the West. Called the ‘Long-Range Policy’ (research on the policy beginning in 1958), the purpose for the policy was to repair Stalin’s mucking up the Communists’ goal of world domination. Thanks to Stalin’s strategic incompetence, Western nations formed defense pacts to counter Communism (NATO, SEATO, ANZUS, and CENTO). After the death of Stalin the Communists decided that a much more subtle strategy was needed if Communism was to prevail.
“The dangers of Stalinism to the communist movement were ignored or overlooked in the 1930s and 1940s because of the threat of fascism and the opportunities that it provided for the formation of popular fronts with socialist parties in the 1930s and for the forging of the wartime alliance with the Western powers. But by 1953-56, the damage Stalinism had done to the communist cause was apparent. It could be seen in the following:
• The distortion, degradation, and discrediting of communist ideology. The image of Marxism as a philosophy had been tarnished in the eyes of Western intellectuals.
• Deepening discontent in the Soviet Union and its satellites, leading to explosive revolutionary situations in East Germany, Poland, and Hungary.
• The decline of communist influence and the isolation of communist parties and regimes.
• The revulsion against Stahnist communism of Western liberals who had earlier been sympathetic.
• The increased influence and prestige of anticommunism.
• Strong opposition from various religious movements, including Catholicism and Islam.
• The formation of Western military alliances, such as NATO, SEATO, and the Bagdad pact (later CENTO).
• Hostility from moderate, genuinely nonaligned national leaders of the developing countries, such as Nehru.
• Cooperation between Western democratic governments and anticommunist emigre organizations.
• Collaboration between social democratic and conservative governments and parties against the Soviet threat.
• Yugoslavia's break with the communist bloc and rapprochement with the West in the period 1948-55.
• The serious tensions between the Soviet Union and Communist China, which threatened to create a split between them in 1950-53.
• Zhdanov's opposition to Stalin.
• The major power struggle in the Soviet leadership that followed Stalin's death.”
The balance of New Lies for Old covers the eight disinformation operations (as Golitsyn counts them by 1984) under the new ‘Long-Range Policy’, such as the fraudulent Sino-Soviet Split, and Communist play-acting that led Western analysts to mistakenly conclude that ‘power struggles’ existed within Soviet, Chinese, and other Communist governments.
Golitsyn not only warned the West about the ‘Long-Range Policy’, but also used his in-side knowledge to predict with an amazing degree of accuracy future USSR/East Bloc behavior. Author Mark Riebling in his 1994 book 'Wedge: From Pearl Harbor to 9/11: How The Secret War Between The FBI And CIA Has Endangered National Security' credits Golitsyn with a whopping 94% accuracy rate in predicting Communist moves.
As mentioned above, New Lies for Old was published seven years before the ‘collapse’ of the USSR, so one might inquire if the ‘collapse’ of the USSR was a strategic ruse, why does the West remain silent on it? Why doesn’t the West alert its populations to the deception?
The West pretends that the collapse of the USSR was genuine due to the interplay of two factors: (1) business pressures exerted on political parties to allow for trade with the ‘former’ USSR/East Bloc, and (2) the intense need of political parties for business largesse in the form of campaign contributions. Businesses want to do business in the ‘former’ USSR/East Bloc and political parties need money for elections. The intense competition for election money ensures that our political leaders remain silent on the Soviet ruse, while quietly engaging the USSR (witness the United States’ current attempt to place a missile shield in Eastern Europe, which would, according to Russian generals, neutralize Russia’s strategic nuclear forces).
Will The United States’ ‘compromised strategy’ against the Communist world work? Or will the Communists’ ‘Long-Range Policy’ prevail? Since the Communists’ ‘Long-Range Policy’ has now been revealed, the Communists’ strategy will fail if enough people are made aware of it. That means you, reader, must do your duty and play the role of Paul Revere!
One might also query why ‘former’ East Bloc nations would agree to house NATO’s missile shield inside their territories considering those governments are still Communist? My answer to that question is NATO believes that the leaders of those countries are no longer enthralled by the ‘Long-Range Policy’, preferring ‘backdoor largesse’ from the West. NATO’s belief is a mistake in my estimation, and the mistake will become apparent to NATO when the affected East Bloc nations decide not to house NATO’s missile shield just before it is to become operational (wasting tens of billions of dollars), which is expected to be in 2015. Watch to see if this prediction materializes.
My analysis that NATO’s missile shield will be cancelled at the last hour would explain nicely (for the official explanation is simply ludicrous) the April 10, 2010 crash in Smolensk, Russia of the Polish President’s plane, reportedly killing the President and the top echelon of the Polish government. The crash, in my opinion, was a Communist intelligence operation, the purpose of which was to cement in the minds of the West that the Polish government was seen by Russia as a threat to the ‘Long-Range Policy’ through its willingness to host the NATO missile shield. Needless to say, in this scenario the Polish President and entourage are still alive.
Another major event to occur under the ‘Long-Range Policy’ involves China. Watch for the Chinese Communist government to ‘collapse’ due to a manufactured economic crisis in several years (circa 2015). This prediction comes from Golitsyn’s second book published in 1995, The Perestroika Deception. In it Golitsyn says about China on page 166:
“A campaign for a new system of World Government will be launched at Summit level and will be accompanied by pressure from below, the active use of agents of influence and secret assassinations of leaders who are seen as obstacles. The campaign will come as a surprise to the US Administration. In the ensuing negotiations, the US President of the day will find himself facing a combined pressure from the Russians and the Chinese. The Chinese will by then have adopted a ‘reformed’, pseudo-democratic system.”
So, according to Golitsyn, the new democratic government to arise in China will be controlled by the Communists from behind the scenes.
If Golitsyn’s analysis on China comes to pass then watch Mexico. Contemporaneous with the change in government in China, the so-called ‘drug wars’ will have spread throughout Mexico. Watch to see who Mexico asks for assistance in combating the ‘drug wars’ there: China!
|Filesxml:||Mon Aug 24 18:02:56 UTC 2009|
|Ocr:||ABBYY FineReader 8.0|